Cirdan
Senior Master
Have you tried catching the flies with your mouth yet? That is real skill mate. I can`t do it, but I am sure one of your speed intuition and distinguished background will have no problem trapping several at the same time.
Can Anyone Identify This Technique For Me?
- Thread starter Zenjael
- Start date
- Status
Have you tried catching the flies with your mouth yet? That is real skill mate. I can`t do it, but I am sure one of your speed intuition and distinguished background will have no problem trapping several at the same time.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,930
- Reaction score
- 1,452
No problem, Alex.I recognize what your talking about-this technique came down from Wow-tu Pow Gai Po-kre in China, to Shamar-ryu Aikijujutsu, on the island of Guam, all the way to New York, where it became part of the repertoire of
Yuchi vetur ki .
It's called "The Quart of Blood Technique:
Last edited by a moderator:
Awww dammit now I have to watch the whole thing. Alex, I hope you're maintaining a sense of humour here....
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
Last edited by a moderator:
Cirdan
Senior Master
:viking1:artyon:
Pleased you're back and telling it like it is!!
Glad to see you again Tez
GaryR
Green Belt
K-Man,
Sorry for the delay, I will respond to your last posts in installments due to the volumination & broad nature of the discussion.
The first issues I want to address is your fallacious ideas regarding fajing (in part), and torque--which you incorrectly say is not involved.
I'm sorry if you feel attacked, that was not my intent, I am trying to have an objective, and productive conversation, it was others who brought in my business and made things more personal.
A lot of context is is when someone uses a one way medium. I will try and be sure to not be offensive to anyone, my apologies.
However, there are several explicit claims that are simply untrue and inaccurate. As time permits I will address them, and keep it objective, if you don't appreciate it fine, perhaps other readers will be more wise.
I agree with you in part, no doubt your method sounds sufficiently effective. However, your idea of no torque being involved is simply flawed. Its in fact very much about torque, what do you think the waist is doing when its shaking back and forth? The power is rooted in the waist, sending the momentum from your waist down is not only a waist of power as it disperses into ground and back--it takes more time. Moreover, the waist and back etc. cannot generate the same momentum as the legs pushing up first.
"Conservation of energy and momentum basically tell you that the power you generate in a punch, should be directly proportional with the amount your legs and body push off the earth, if you do it right.
The law of inertia encourages you to not get in the way of an opponent's momentum, but to step aside and guide it in the same direction they already started with. Also it encourages deflection of blows instead of directly getting in the way.
The concept of centripetal motion/acceleration is the same thing, in that if you grab someone's punch as they come to you, it is much easier to guide it in a circular arc just by "pulling inward", than it would be to knock it aside." (Nianfong, http://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=15028, )
Thus your using the waist for power, (as well as control and rotational force--which is good)
More ..., first part more technical..
"Rotational Mechanics
First, one should understand that any object in space has 6 degrees of freedom. 3 of these are cartesian translation (eg, the X, Y, and Z axes). The other 3 are rotations about those cartesian axes. The preceding laws of mechanics have applied (for the most part) to cartesian translation, but only partially apply to rotational motion of objects.
Rotational Mechanics are mechanics involving rotation of a body. This is different from centripetal forces are sometimes external forces applying to a body moving in a circular path, whereas rotational mechanics involve rotation of the bodies themselves.
Fundamentally, rotational mechanics uses polar coordinates to describe rotation. If you imagine a point in the XY plane, modeled in cartesian coordinates as X = 1, Y=1, or (1,1), that same point can also be modeled using polar coordinates as R=Sqrt(2), Theta = Pi/4 = 45 degrees (Sqrt(2), Pi/4). Using trig the R of the point can be derived using the pythagorean theorem as X^2+Y^2=R^2, which solves to R=Sqrt(2). Pi/4 is in radians, which is another way to describe angles, in that one circumference is 2*pi*R, so we let 360 degrees = 2*pi so that the integral works out to 2*pi*R (just trust me on this).
OK, you probably don't actually need to know all that, but it will help you understand where the following formulae come from:
Moment of Inertia: I = m * R^2. This is a scalar quantity, and is the rotational inertia of a point mass rotating around a stationary point one R away. m = mass.
Angular Displacement = theta = omega. In radians, this is the angle change of a point. It is a vector, using the right-hand rule to dictate direction of the vector.
Arc Displacement = R x theta. where theta is in radians. This is simply the distance drawn by an arc of radius R, over an angle theta. In general, all angular distances/velocities/accelerations become "linear" (arc) displacements/velocities/accelerations, when you cross them with the radius vector.
Angular velocity = theta' = nu (the greek letter). This is the derivative dtheta/dt, and is the rate of change of the angular displacement w.r.t. time.
Angular acceleration = theta'' = alpha (the greek letter). This is the second derivative, d^2theta/dt^2, and is the rate of change of the angular velocity w.r.t. time.
Angular momentum: L = R x P = I * omega. for an unchanging mass, I becomes a scalar quantity.
With these formulae, you can now extend all of the fundamental laws of physics from Chapter 1 into the angular/rotational (Polar coordinate) realm.
Newton's Law of Inertia (Rotational)
A body in rotation stays in rotation. In other words, a body rotating at a constant speed will continue to rotate at that speed until an external force is applied.
Newton's 2nd Law (Rotational) Defining Torque
T = dL/dt = I x alpha (when the moment of inertia is constant) = alpha dI/dt + I dnu/dt (if both moment of inertia and velocity are changing)
Torque/Moment is the derivative of Angular momentum w.r.t. time. Remember, because moment of inertia is related to the distance of the rotating body's center of mass to the center of rotation, and also the moment of inertia of the body spinning in one of its own "internal axes", the moment of inertia will often change over time.
Newton's 3rd Law (Rotational) the Law of Action-Reaction.
This is very much the same as the linear one, but just applying to rotational motion instead.
Conservation of Angular Momentum
The net angular momentum of a system will always stay constant.
Imagine an ice skater spinning with extended leg, then pulling the leg inward. Her moment of inertia becomes smaller, when her leg pulls in, but her angular momentum must remain constant, so she spins faster.
We use this same concept in shuaijiao, when we spin/coil before throws. We spin with leg extended and then pull the leg inward to turn faster. The intention is for your main torso to turn faster, so you do it this way.
The concept is used for kicks through the "chamber" in an opposite manner. You lift your leg with knee bent because the moment of inertia is smaller (easier to lift), so you can chamber your kick quicker. Then you snap your lower leg out as you near the target, slowing down your rotation, but also increasing your moment of inertia to increase the penetration power of your kick. This is also why a muay thai roundhouse is more powerful than a TKD roundhouse. The TKD roundhouse goes through the chamber, so has more speed because it is more efficient to get the leg out at full extension, but at the end of the acceleration, has less total angular momentum. However the Muay Thai roundhouse does not go through the chamber, so your hip motion continuously adds angular momentum to your kicking leg. This is also why their kicks are slower than TKD kicks.
Conservation of angular momentum is also responsible for precession and gyroscopic effects. (to be continued)" (Nianfong @ http://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=15049)
Perhaps, that clears things up. I agree that it motion is somewhat akin to a dog shaking off water, and that everthing should be relaxed, facts simply disprove your idea that no torque is involved. Unless there is some imaginary magical force generated by the waist over the legs, you are wrong.
Additionally, I'll comment on this:
No offense, but not all on the forum are equal. This is impossible. So it stands to reason not all voices are equal, experience, method, methanics, evolution all mater.
If we were all in a room together playing around it would be readily apparent who is who. At that point, who are you going to listen too? It's frustrating to be the guy in the room saying, WTF are you people doing, try that on me, and very likely I won't even need to hurt you to demonstrate. Learn it pull it off, then you will have some credibility to approach someone as an equal.
From what I've seen I could give some good corrections to the head of your current style--Taira (or at least a highranking figure head). There is nothing I have seen the man do that I could not mimick and pull off to the same degree or better in a combative and biomechanical context. I can demo with to videos, and give specifics over time if you like.
Thus, I can only conclude that your style is not equal or "Exacly like" the fajing and mechanics in Neijia. In fact judging by the people in the background of those clips, it is far from. You might by more personally successful by the integration, and subjectively think things are inherent in your Karate, but your lack of understanding of physics and biomechanics keep you from progressing, and peaking closer to the higher level Neijia folks, which methods you have abandoned for those whicy will mal-train you.
Get back to me on torque though, I'm awaiting the explaination for your comment. :bangahead:
Best,
Gary
Edit: I have about a ten year old video that demonstrates the movement from the ground, and the shake a bit, particularly the movement (http://www.flowingcombat.net/freelesson/movement1.php) and method 1 (http://www.flowingcombat.net/freelesson/method1.php)--sections seems more pertinent to this discussion.
http://www.flowingcombat.net/freelesson/
Sorry for the delay, I will respond to your last posts in installments due to the volumination & broad nature of the discussion.
The first issues I want to address is your fallacious ideas regarding fajing (in part), and torque--which you incorrectly say is not involved.
I'm sorry if you feel attacked, that was not my intent, I am trying to have an objective, and productive conversation, it was others who brought in my business and made things more personal.
A lot of context is is when someone uses a one way medium. I will try and be sure to not be offensive to anyone, my apologies.
However, there are several explicit claims that are simply untrue and inaccurate. As time permits I will address them, and keep it objective, if you don't appreciate it fine, perhaps other readers will be more wise.
I agree with you in part, no doubt your method sounds sufficiently effective. However, your idea of no torque being involved is simply flawed. Its in fact very much about torque, what do you think the waist is doing when its shaking back and forth? The power is rooted in the waist, sending the momentum from your waist down is not only a waist of power as it disperses into ground and back--it takes more time. Moreover, the waist and back etc. cannot generate the same momentum as the legs pushing up first.
"Conservation of energy and momentum basically tell you that the power you generate in a punch, should be directly proportional with the amount your legs and body push off the earth, if you do it right.
The law of inertia encourages you to not get in the way of an opponent's momentum, but to step aside and guide it in the same direction they already started with. Also it encourages deflection of blows instead of directly getting in the way.
The concept of centripetal motion/acceleration is the same thing, in that if you grab someone's punch as they come to you, it is much easier to guide it in a circular arc just by "pulling inward", than it would be to knock it aside." (Nianfong, http://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=15028, )
Thus your using the waist for power, (as well as control and rotational force--which is good)
More ..., first part more technical..
"Rotational Mechanics
First, one should understand that any object in space has 6 degrees of freedom. 3 of these are cartesian translation (eg, the X, Y, and Z axes). The other 3 are rotations about those cartesian axes. The preceding laws of mechanics have applied (for the most part) to cartesian translation, but only partially apply to rotational motion of objects.
Rotational Mechanics are mechanics involving rotation of a body. This is different from centripetal forces are sometimes external forces applying to a body moving in a circular path, whereas rotational mechanics involve rotation of the bodies themselves.
Fundamentally, rotational mechanics uses polar coordinates to describe rotation. If you imagine a point in the XY plane, modeled in cartesian coordinates as X = 1, Y=1, or (1,1), that same point can also be modeled using polar coordinates as R=Sqrt(2), Theta = Pi/4 = 45 degrees (Sqrt(2), Pi/4). Using trig the R of the point can be derived using the pythagorean theorem as X^2+Y^2=R^2, which solves to R=Sqrt(2). Pi/4 is in radians, which is another way to describe angles, in that one circumference is 2*pi*R, so we let 360 degrees = 2*pi so that the integral works out to 2*pi*R (just trust me on this).
OK, you probably don't actually need to know all that, but it will help you understand where the following formulae come from:
Moment of Inertia: I = m * R^2. This is a scalar quantity, and is the rotational inertia of a point mass rotating around a stationary point one R away. m = mass.
Angular Displacement = theta = omega. In radians, this is the angle change of a point. It is a vector, using the right-hand rule to dictate direction of the vector.
Arc Displacement = R x theta. where theta is in radians. This is simply the distance drawn by an arc of radius R, over an angle theta. In general, all angular distances/velocities/accelerations become "linear" (arc) displacements/velocities/accelerations, when you cross them with the radius vector.
Angular velocity = theta' = nu (the greek letter). This is the derivative dtheta/dt, and is the rate of change of the angular displacement w.r.t. time.
Angular acceleration = theta'' = alpha (the greek letter). This is the second derivative, d^2theta/dt^2, and is the rate of change of the angular velocity w.r.t. time.
Angular momentum: L = R x P = I * omega. for an unchanging mass, I becomes a scalar quantity.
With these formulae, you can now extend all of the fundamental laws of physics from Chapter 1 into the angular/rotational (Polar coordinate) realm.
Newton's Law of Inertia (Rotational)
A body in rotation stays in rotation. In other words, a body rotating at a constant speed will continue to rotate at that speed until an external force is applied.
Newton's 2nd Law (Rotational) Defining Torque
T = dL/dt = I x alpha (when the moment of inertia is constant) = alpha dI/dt + I dnu/dt (if both moment of inertia and velocity are changing)
Torque/Moment is the derivative of Angular momentum w.r.t. time. Remember, because moment of inertia is related to the distance of the rotating body's center of mass to the center of rotation, and also the moment of inertia of the body spinning in one of its own "internal axes", the moment of inertia will often change over time.
Newton's 3rd Law (Rotational) the Law of Action-Reaction.
This is very much the same as the linear one, but just applying to rotational motion instead.
Conservation of Angular Momentum
The net angular momentum of a system will always stay constant.
Imagine an ice skater spinning with extended leg, then pulling the leg inward. Her moment of inertia becomes smaller, when her leg pulls in, but her angular momentum must remain constant, so she spins faster.
We use this same concept in shuaijiao, when we spin/coil before throws. We spin with leg extended and then pull the leg inward to turn faster. The intention is for your main torso to turn faster, so you do it this way.
The concept is used for kicks through the "chamber" in an opposite manner. You lift your leg with knee bent because the moment of inertia is smaller (easier to lift), so you can chamber your kick quicker. Then you snap your lower leg out as you near the target, slowing down your rotation, but also increasing your moment of inertia to increase the penetration power of your kick. This is also why a muay thai roundhouse is more powerful than a TKD roundhouse. The TKD roundhouse goes through the chamber, so has more speed because it is more efficient to get the leg out at full extension, but at the end of the acceleration, has less total angular momentum. However the Muay Thai roundhouse does not go through the chamber, so your hip motion continuously adds angular momentum to your kicking leg. This is also why their kicks are slower than TKD kicks.
Conservation of angular momentum is also responsible for precession and gyroscopic effects. (to be continued)" (Nianfong @ http://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=15049)
Perhaps, that clears things up. I agree that it motion is somewhat akin to a dog shaking off water, and that everthing should be relaxed, facts simply disprove your idea that no torque is involved. Unless there is some imaginary magical force generated by the waist over the legs, you are wrong.
Additionally, I'll comment on this:
No offense, but not all on the forum are equal. This is impossible. So it stands to reason not all voices are equal, experience, method, methanics, evolution all mater.
If we were all in a room together playing around it would be readily apparent who is who. At that point, who are you going to listen too? It's frustrating to be the guy in the room saying, WTF are you people doing, try that on me, and very likely I won't even need to hurt you to demonstrate. Learn it pull it off, then you will have some credibility to approach someone as an equal.
From what I've seen I could give some good corrections to the head of your current style--Taira (or at least a highranking figure head). There is nothing I have seen the man do that I could not mimick and pull off to the same degree or better in a combative and biomechanical context. I can demo with to videos, and give specifics over time if you like.
Thus, I can only conclude that your style is not equal or "Exacly like" the fajing and mechanics in Neijia. In fact judging by the people in the background of those clips, it is far from. You might by more personally successful by the integration, and subjectively think things are inherent in your Karate, but your lack of understanding of physics and biomechanics keep you from progressing, and peaking closer to the higher level Neijia folks, which methods you have abandoned for those whicy will mal-train you.
Get back to me on torque though, I'm awaiting the explaination for your comment. :bangahead:
Best,
Gary
Edit: I have about a ten year old video that demonstrates the movement from the ground, and the shake a bit, particularly the movement (http://www.flowingcombat.net/freelesson/movement1.php) and method 1 (http://www.flowingcombat.net/freelesson/method1.php)--sections seems more pertinent to this discussion.
http://www.flowingcombat.net/freelesson/
Last edited:
Once again Gary you have posted a lot of nonsense combined with comments denigrating other practitioners and other styles.
Thread locked pending staff review
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
- Status
Similar threads
- Deleted member 39746
- General Martial Arts Talk
